GraphHopper plugin update

I am a GraphHopper user. While I know that it has been done and a great effort is being made to integrate BRouter as an off-line route engine, I think that GraphHopper is still a very good option.

In October a new version was released, 0.8. My question is if you are upgrading the GraphHopper plugin? If you are going to continue maintenance?

Question aside, but related to the topic. Have you done a comparative analysis of GraphHopper vs Brouter, beyond knowing that BRouter allows you to customize the profiles? Example, route calculation time, resources consumed, updating of base data for the calculation, etc.

It is good to know that updating the GraphHopper plugin is in the to do list.

Personally I use GraphHopper for the simple to install and do not require configuration. In addition it allows to generate the data to use basic as routing, so it can be kept up to date (just download a map portion in pbf).

The current locus plugin works great.

I do not know at the level of resource consumption and precision which one is more efficient ...

Have you done any comparative between both alternatives (BRouter / GraphHopper)?

On the page that allows you to use BRouter you can select alternate results / routes, that's a good point. From Locus can you use that feature?

I also never tested quality of both engines, sorry. I remember I used GraphHopper on my last vacation last-last summer (1,5 years back) and I was not too happy with result for a bike, anyway since then, situation changed a lot.

Alternative routes from BRouter are not currently supported in Locus Map.

Because we have some problems with MapQuest ( old data + inadequate price ), I'll try to implement online GraphHopper routing during next weeks. If results will be useful, I may try to contact developer about option to update it's offline solution as well.

Hi Menion, what good news! It is a very good first step to try the online version. Hopefully you can contact the developer to update the offline version (plugin).

I regularly use the file generator that is needed for offline use that you have published. This allows me to have updated the necessary data for the routing based on pbf files that I download from bbbike.org.

1. Why are there two versions of the plugin available? I installed the last one and it worked very well, but with the data for the calculation of the route that are also in the link.

2. It is possible to put in the link the script that generates the data that is used for the calculation of the route. I tried the last version of the plugin with the data generated with a previous script that you had published and it gives error. So I tried with the data that you have published (argentina.osm.gh) and it worked.

This to ask if you can publish the script is because living near the border of two countries generated the data with both together so that it can trace a route from one to another. It also serves to keep the data up to date.

Hello Menion, I wanted to check if you saw that there is a difference between generating a route with the profile "foot" to do with the "hike" profile. The plugin only allows you to choose one, which apparently by drawing the icon is hike, but seeing the config.properties file is generated for foot.

I tried changing it in the file and generate for both, foot and hike, but the plugin only lets you choose one of them.

Just by way of comment, why the name "fast"? I think the name "fast" for the profile may confuse and does not reflect what the profile is actually ... can you switch to "hike"? This would be the same as how the profile is known in graphhopper.

Can anyone who uses the Graphhopper routing-engine comment on the following observation:

If a road or trail crosses a stream via a ford (walk through the water, no bridge, no culvert), Graphhopper refuses to route through it.

In OpenStreetMap, the node where the trail and stream cross is tagged with "ford=yes". BRouter has no problem routing through the ford but Graphhopper refuses.

The only way to make Graphhopper route through the ford is to add "foot=yes" to the node (assuming it is a foot-trail). However, this is not an OSM standard for a ford and is uniquely required by Graphhopper.

I just wanted to try this and got the GraphHopper plugin installed and recognized from Locus. But how would I do navigation without downloading offline maps, e.g. navigating via the GraphHopper Directions API and using thunderforest tiles - or is this not yet possible or only possible with a different plugin and this plugin is just about offline routing?

At the moment it says: 'no valid routing item selected' when I try to navigate.